Wishlist

The current Mesh tool is no longer sufficient for modern BIM standards. We need a dedicated DTM (Digital Terrain Model) tool that behaves with engineering logic rather than just being a surface.

Key Requirements:

• Existing vs. Proposed: Native management of terrain phases to automatically calculate Cut & Fill volumes.

• Advanced Visualization: Independent display settings for 2D and 3D. We need to show contour lines and technical grids simultaneously without graphic override workarounds.

• Infrastructure Tools: Integrated path and road tools that follow terrain slopes, including automatic curbs and longitudinal sections.

• Logic: Similar to Allplan’s site tools, where the terrain is the starting point of the project, not just a decorative mesh.

Why it matters: Accuracy in site coordination and earthwork volumes is critical for the early stages of any project and for proper BIM collaboration.

Complex Profiles already allow for powerful modeling via stretch-based modifiers (width, height, offsets), but to take them to the next level, Archicad should support additional parametric controls, specifically:

• Editable angles (e.g. sloped cuts, bevels, chamfers)

• Editable radii (e.g. rounded corners, grooves, bullnoses)

This wishlist proposes enhancing the Complex Profile system by adding angle and radius parameters that can be adjusted per instance, making profiles more flexible, reusable, and intelligent.

Proposed Features:

• Inside the Profile Manager, users could:

  • Define angle dimensions with named parameters (e.g., "slope angle")

  • Define radius controls for arcs and curves (e.g., "curve radius")

• These parameters would be exposed in the settings of any element using that profile (Wall, Beam, Column), similar to existing Stretch Modifiers.

• The geometry would update live, keeping the profile associative and clean.

• Optional constraints (min/max, lock to other parameters) would allow safer, smarter profiles.

• Angle inputs could be in degrees, and radius could be numeric or locked to proportions.

Labels don't mirror properly, which is exponentially problematic in mirrored modules, where the messed up label can't be edited.

Refer also:

Modules: required improvements 

Make Modules Great Again - 1: In Place Module Management 
Make Modules Great Again - 2: Embedded Library Management 

Make Modules Great Again - 3: Attribute Management 

Make Modules Great Again - 4.0: Schedule Modules 

Make Modules Great Again - 4.1: Schedule Mirrored Modules 

Make Modules Great Again - 5: Modules Source Storey 

We urgently need much better control of surface merging.

Everybody knows the issue: You model e.g. two beams, made out of the same BMAT – boom! they merge unintentionally, leading to very strange workarounds of either duplicating all the BMats (not helping often enough in more complex situations) or model pieces a thousand of a millimeter away (BAD practice as it introduces dimensional errors later on).

We need to be able to select for each tool if they should surface join on touch or not!

In the meantime it would be nice if at least the proper funtioning of the special layer intersection group "0" (zero) would be restored.

If a layer has its intersection group set to 0 none of the elements in it should surface join even with each other.

There are almost 1000 wishes in this forum. Many of them would be obvious improvements - making the software more functional, intuitive, integrated, and dynamic.

Instead of waiting for TWO HUNDRED people to express dissatisfaction on this forum, how about somebody from Graphisoft regularly reviews the wishes for what are almost objectively good ideas and works to get them on the roadmap and into the software?

I've been on this Wishlist since it was created and there's a lot of gold in here. I don't know that we deserve compensation for these wishes as another user has suggested, but I would like all of the good ideas we are putting forth to actually help improve the software.  I know wishes are moving to "Under Consideration" with 20, 30, 40 upvotes. I'm just saying can we restructure this a little?

The community provides good ideas -> Graphisoft reviews *ALL* of them -> The good ones get incorporated, *especially* the ones with many upvotes.

Would anyone else like to see more than a handful of these ideas get into the software?

EDIT: (moving this from a comment into the post)

I think part of what is happening is that the Wishlist forum is fielding both Wishes with a capital W ("wouldn't it be cool if Archicad could ___"), and User Experience feedback ("this tool isn't working as expected", "there are inconsistencies in your interface", "I'm not able to ___ when this happens, but it works everywhere else", "in your latest update, you lost this feature").

There is so much UX feedback - we have essentially become a global UX team, which on the one hand is great - we use the product day in and day out and can easily notice when the experience isn't meeting par. The key is that Graphisoft needs to sort out which "wishes" are aspirational and which are essential. As a daily U, this would greatly improve my X.

I updated the Shoegnome Open Template to use the INT Windows and Doors. For the most part, I'm happy with the switch, but I found a number of features that I will miss from the USA Windows and Doors. My hope is that GRAPHISOFT will add the following items to the INT doors and windows so that the USA objects can eventually be sunset:

• USA can do exterior and/or interior handles (closet sliding doors don’t need handles on interior). INT doors have handles on both sides of leaf or neither.
• USA door leafs can extend behind the door frame. INT door leafs always push in front of the door frame. My bookcase door leaf works beautifully with the USA doors, but with the INT doors, I either need to hide the frame or have the frame as thick as the bookcase door. Both are bad options.
• INT windows can have a board or casing at the interior bottom of the window. It needs to be able to have both. USA windows can have an interior apron and stool.
• INT Overhead Garage Door doesn't have a casing option. Every other garage door (in the INT and USA libraries) do. This should be fixed.
• INT Sliding Folding Multipanel door doesn’t have a threshold option, it should.
• Exterior Sliding Door INT and Exterior Double Sliding Door INT don't move away from the wall when trim is added. And there's no way to set the distance of the leaf from the wall (USA versions move based on trim thickness, even when trim is turned off).
• INT windows and door trim doesn't work with Create Opening from Selection, meaning a window or door won't cut siding or tile that its trim intersects with. I explain the issue and my workaround in these YouTube Videos: https://youtu.be/hrFwsKGFlS8 and https://youtu.be/0I8bqXvLr5E?si=WRIKirt0UqUBW4Zf

Often I need to create some kind of wall which will be trimmed on the top part in diagonal. For example a wall along stairs ... 
To do so there is several approach :
- Create a roof and trim with roof and hide roof or 
- Create a roof and crop 
- Create a morph from wall but it lost some editing possibility (and morph editing is messy)
- Create a special profil in 2D
- Solid element operation and then hide operator element

They are all taking time and need to create other component to arrived to such result.
After all there are already several way to create wall with different thickness for example but this is only for the 2D plan.   
I which there would be a fast way to do the same "verticaly", editing wall height at both end of the wall :

Forgive me if there is already a wish and/or discussion around this topic, but there should be automatic text list formatting available for the Text tool and Label tool. Even just two options would suffice: plain text bullets, and numbers. The main benefit would come when edits to a list is needed: say you need to add a line item for number 10, in your list of 30. Automatic numbering would be really helpful here; right now it would all be manual.

Some instances where this would be helpful include General Notes, Door Schedules Remarks, etc. There are quite a few instances where a plain text/label box is the most efficient workflow, for quick user editing and project management.

Hello all, 

It would be super nice to add the option coordinate the Drawing tool with the Survey point same as the Xref. 

The Drawing tool has many benefits opposite from Xref:

• keeps all attributes out of Archicad
• possible to turn on/off layers 
• possible to easy change Pens & Colors 
• possible to paste all elements into AC with option to put them in one layer
• still linked with the original file 

In practice I used to use mainly for references with MEP and other consultants. Also in cases when some parts of the project are only 2D existing drawings etc.

All best!